Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    May 12, 2012 7:30am-8:00am PDT

7:30 am
approve the conditional uses? he was sort of perplexed. he said, if they do not approve it, it is over. but once they approve it, they must understand it is almost automatically going to be approved. no matter the in-the impact on residents or writretail or the restaurants. abc does not turn down things usually, assuming it is not criminal. if it has been approved by the city, they accept what the city said. the committee and the board of supervisors in their office says, we have no grounds to turn it down. if it was recommended by the police, it was recommended by the planning commission. it will just automatically happen. no matter what the residents may do -- in one case coming up we had 60 protesters. essentially, they are going to go by the wayside. i will come back and talk with you about this more again.
7:31 am
president fong: is there additional general public comment? >> my name is robert garcia, president of "save our streets, tenants and merchants association. and what linda chapman was telling you is correct. polk street has become a dumping ground. it is bad enough they have problems with so many bars that have sprung up in the last few years, but they are bossing them in now from a lot -- around the bay area. bringing them in and dropping them off on the other side of union square. they walk right across from the lower nob hill, the most densely populated area west of new york. they come in groups of sometimes 75 or 100 and are heading for polk street.
7:32 am
poultry was our shopping area. it was really a great street. i go all the way back to the 1950's on polk street. and my grandparents lived here. and now, it is just unbearable. it is unbearable what is happening there. the clubs are attracting just a very, very negative element. the calls for service on the corner of sutter and pulp -- sutter and polk street, the last time i got calls for service, if you get 125 calls for service in one year to a police reporting plot, which is a roughly one block area, those are grounds for losing your liquor license. the last stat i got on that corner for that senses track
7:33 am
were 5550. that is off the chart and it is unacceptable. and it has only gotten worse. and now with the new bars being approved for it, it is only making it worse. even when we go from the lower nob hill area over 2 van ness avenue, we have to cross through this area. it is bad. it just should not be happening. we need to clean it out. we need to look at what is happening there. and reverse this trend. it has got to be reversed. thank you. president fong: additional public comment? whoever is ready. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is adam. i am a resident at 709 geary st.. president fong: is this related
7:34 am
to an item we are going to hear in a little bit? >> it is related to item two >> we have not called that item. president fong: we will give you an opportunity. >> ok, thank you. >> my name is ron case. i am the current chairman of lower pulp neighbors. -- lower polk street neighbors. and i have listened to this i don't know how many times from robert chap -- linda chapman and robert garcia. neither of them live on polk street. yes, we have some problems, but listen to the truth and do not just agree with everything they say. they seem to have stretched the truth quite a bit. we got static when we planted trees along polk street, that we're ruining the neighborhood. they will never talk about anything nice. it is always in-comment. we have yet to have either one of them volunteered to do anything for polk street.
7:35 am
that is my comment. president fong: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i represent a small business holding company. i would like to touch on what commissioner moore was talking about earlier, that is, walgreen's. 68 walgreen's in the city is too many -- i will not say it is too many, but i think it in half. we spent two hours talking about a local business, a copy shop, a really nice coffee shop that is totally different in every store. they have good character, nights staff. obverses a pharmaceutical company. and national -- reverses a pharmaceutical company, a national chain that spans across the u.s.. it does not seem to reflect the city to me.
7:36 am
i would like to thank you for your work on slowing down the growth of these chains, and i hope that we continue to slow them down in the future. president fong: any additional public comment? >> ok, thank you. commissioners, can we go back to the items that were pulled off consent? item two would be the first item. it is for 709 geary st.. >> good afternoon. this case is a request for a conditional use authorization to remove two existing antennas and to install of 27 roof-mounted antenna as an equipment to be located -- up to seven roof- mounted antenna at -- and equipment to be located within
7:37 am
the nrc for district. -- with in the rc 4 district. the subject building is considered a historic resourced. the tops of the antenna will be approximately 66 ft. above grade. the site is a location preference 5, according to the site guidelines and the sponsor has investigated nine alternative sites within the vicinity and none of them at the network objectives. the project is consistent with
7:38 am
the sighting guidelines. the antenna will be minimally visible and will not affect the architecture or integrity of the building. it's consistent with the general policies of the plan. i am available for any questions. president fong: project sponsor? >> good afternoon. i am the external affairs representative for at&t california. i am here today with gane eriksson, the consulting engineers. i'm also here with eric lands from the consulting firm. the approval of the cep will permit at&t to remove the two existing antennas on the building and replace them with
7:39 am
seven panel antennas. the necessary equipment will be located on the ground floor any breezeway to the south of the property. the site is a mixed use building. as outlined in the material, at&t conducted an alternative site analysis. nine sites were chosen and evaluated in the surrounding area by our radiofrequency engineers. the site is necessary for at&t to close a coverage gap in its wireless network, as explained in detail in your packets. i will thank rick crawford and the planning staff for helping us to direct and design this location. we ask for your support as we continue to diligently upgrade our network here in san francisco to meet the needs of the wireless telecommunication needs. we're happy to answer any questions you might have. president fong: thank you.
7:40 am
public comment? >> good afternoon, commissioners. i live at 709 years street, where at&t plans to put the antennas. from what i've discovered, the research on what the radiation from the antennas would be is very unclear, to the point that we are deadbeats. there does going to put the antenna's there. -- we are guinea pigs. they are just going to put the antenna's there. there will be there 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and they're just hoping nothing will happen to us. i do not think that is appropriate. we ought to know what is going to happen for the residents there, the long-term health effects from radiation. we should not have to bear the burden of providing this service for the entire city. thank you very much. president fong: any additional public comment?
7:41 am
commissioner borden? commissioner borden: i just want to speak to the member of the public. the health department issues a permit looking at the radio frequency levels. and in our report it says that the radiofrequency is about two 0.4% of the public exposure limit. it you can ask at&t to come to a reading -- to do a reading in your unit if you're concerned. there are a lot of things that produce those radio waves. we do not determine other than nine years. al department determines the health exposure and has said that is fine. our jurisdiction is the land use, whether or not the antennas are properly sited, how they look, and whether or not their
7:42 am
screens. the health issue is concerning for a lot of people. and at the end of the day, we do not know what we do not know. but given what our jurisdiction is and what we have to look at, we do not have grounds for not approving its antenna. i will move to approve with conditions. >> second. commissioner antonini: in keeping with the discussion, after the signing of the antennas, at&t can be asked to come out and verify that the missions are keeping in what was presented as -- that the missions are keeping within what was presented as there before being placed there. that is part of the discussion >> on that motion. commissioner antonini: aye. commissioner borden: aye.
7:43 am
commissioner moore: aye. commissioner miguel: aye. commissioner wu: aye. president fong: aye. it passes unanimously. item number four, fouror 198, 145 -- a 1436 poulter street as well as 1567 california state street. >> and use green wall is being installed. according to the department citing ninth guidelines it is in
7:44 am
a preferable location. the wireless guidelines state that the preference location may be approved by the condition if a higher price for its side is not available. in this instance, at&t submitted an alternative analysis about the efforts that at&t made in terms of finding a more preferable area. no other site located within its service area. none of these sites would be as desirable, partly due to incompatible site design and site operation issues. department staff has reviewed the site analysis and concurred that the project is the most viable site and recommends that the king did -- the commission does the same. to this point, the department has received a letter in opposition from a nearby residential neighbor.
7:45 am
this neighbors' concerns revolve around radiofrequency exposure and private views. as you are aware, the public health has found the site is in conformance with the ftc and radiofrequency exposure. private views are not protected by the code. the staff recommends approval for the following reasons. the wireless facility would allow at&t to expand our wireless network in the project area. the project is consistent with the sighting guidelines and it will be screened from public view. that includes the staff presentation. i'm available for questions. president fong: public comment? i'm sorry, project sponsor. >> good afternoon, again. i am with at&t california.
7:46 am
i'm still here with the same representatives. we are seeking a conditional use permit for 1498, 1436 polk street as well as 1456 california st.. we are seeking to install nine roof-mounted panel antennas. the necessary equipment will be located at the rear of the service parking lot at 1567 california st.. there will be screened. this is the preferable location and we did conduct alternative site analysis on 15 sites in that area. all 15 were preference six locations. the site is also necessary for us to close and address significant coverage gaps that we are experiencing within the city of san francisco.
7:47 am
and i want to thank aaron holster for his hard work in helping us to design this site and helping us with issues surrounding its design. we ask for your support on this application president fong: -- on this application. president fong: public comment? i have one speaker cards, linda chapman. rex i have two concerns. the last time -- >> i have two concerns. the last time we spoke about this time what you know, there were several of these in the nob hill area. they really needed to be did -- to be consolidated into one things that people could object or not. i appreciate you giving with the mission subject. i am concerned about appearances. on nob hill, you very little open space, if any, as you look down from your flat roofs over your view. maybe it does not matter as
7:48 am
much in this area. but the main concern is the park next door. it sounds like it is a rather large thing. will it impede the park that i hope to see their someday? nob hill neighbors when we active had a park planned in the city and the developer and owner took them to court and it turned out he got his appraisal raised and the city could not buy it. we lost the one on top of the hill. then andy butler, who was our landscape architect worked on it. at that time, this little side with a bank parking lot. it could not have been used and we would not have considered it. next to this was another lot, which was essentially abandoned. the two of them together are the last side i can think of on nob hill that could ever be open space. can i make this happen?
7:49 am
no, and i have taken is to many neighbors. but as you have heard, i have no concern about cold street. and obviously, they're not concerned about it at present. maybe someday they will be and maybe someday, we can make this happen. these two spots are underutilized and together next to the cable line are perfect. we have no open space on nob hill to accept for one pathway on top of the hill. in all of the other neighborhoods that i go to, even golden gate park, they have these pocket parks and things of that sort. we did have one success on nob hill years ago. the cdc originated on nob hill. but it is not green. this is something that we really need. and i would like to make sure that if you are passing this,
7:50 am
there will be the ability later to get rid of this construction that will be put on their if, in fact, someone might be lower pulp neighbors decides they might be interested in promoting open space as opposed to promoting bars. and if the city can find money to do this, as they once did for us up on top of nob hill. that is my chief concern for this location. president fong: any additional public comment? the public hearing portion is closed. commissioner miguel. commissioner miguel: move to approve. >> commissioners, there is a motion on the floor for approval commissioner antonini: aye. commissioner borden: aye. commissioner miguel: aye. commissioner moore: aye. commissioner wu: aye. president fong: aye. >> the motion passes unanimously. you are now on item 541145 polk
7:51 am
st., also known as well hundred 1 sutter street. -- 1201 sutter street. >> before you is an authorization request that a walkable facility requiring additional use authorization. the walk-up facility will be in the form of a take up -- takeout window. it willthat takeout window woule located 44 feet from the nearest intersection and adjacent to a 10-foot wide sidewalk on polk street. no other take-out windows are nearby and there are no bike racks or many stops. the owner has not indicated the
7:52 am
restaurant will operate later that current closing time of 9:00 p.m. and application materials are in discussion for the staff. restaurant could operate the restaurant until 2:00 a.m. without a conditional use operation it -- authorization. the restaurant does not have authorization for alcohol sales. staff has received letters of support from the lower polk neighbors with 400 people who support it. there were concerns the project would contribute late-night loitering in the area. the analysis of the project, staff has found several assets would be compatible with a bread for the following reason -- it would minimize obstructions on the sidewalk, and it would use
7:53 am
an underutilized portion of the storefront. the project permit the continued operation of an established a locally-owned business. for these reasons, the staff recommends commission approved the conditional use authorization. i will be available for questions. >> project sponsor? >> good afternoon, commissioners. >> rim one of the owners of the cafe and i recall -- i am requesting this walk up window. -- i am not one of the owners of the cafe and i am requesting this walkup window. i am amazed to hear negative
7:54 am
thoughts about polk street. i have been in the neighborhood since 1984 and i've only seen improvements more than non improvement. for example, at this location, there used to be a store that was open 24 hours and the police department was there almost every single night. since we took over, we cleaned it up and i'm not going to say we improved the whole intersection, but we did a lot better than the previous person. we have very decent fine dining place that is nicely appointed by a very decent people. i have never had any problem. i have never had to call police
7:55 am
whatsoever. i have unbelievable reviews whether with the "san francisco chronicle" or the "sf weekly" all of those, i have been awarded from all of those websites. the idea is to just have a walk up window and to continue exactly the work that i am doing right there. it is exactly the same way. that's all i have to say.
7:56 am
when we took over, we had to go through the conditional use the same way. we were allowed to operate from 6:00 a.m. all the way until 2:00 a.m. right now, i'm doing a little bit different hours. i am just asking for exact same proposal i submitted the first time. it's just a continuance of the work we are doing. thank you very much. president fong: i have some speaker cards. >> how want to say everything he told you about his restaurant, it's true. if you haven't eaten there, you
7:57 am
should. i'm not angry at this man, i am angry with him. he is trying to deal and he has been dealt. look at the photographs at the end of that package. at his restaurant for crack what you crave -- that's what has been done by these bars and the mayor's people they send in, the managers -- that is what has been done. all of the disarray around his restaurant. my understanding is he close is quite early now because he doesn't want to deal with those customers and they would keep away the kind of customers he would want to deal with. anybody going to the mosque right around the corner has to pass by all of that stuff. all of those ads which are now painted black. i tried to call planning to see if something could be done about it.
7:58 am
how can restaurant, a proper restaurant like his survive in an atmosphere like you have created. this is from one of your former planners who retired in this area quite well and use it to work there. she said we used to go out there at night and we would talk with the merchants and they did not want next to them places like all of these bars or sexy lingerie shops, that they harmed businesses like his. what happened when there were other food vendors to set up on the street? i have no question about his good nature or intent. what happened is all of the drunks from the bars gathered around their out whenever our it was an people the residents had to call the police to clear them out. they had no permit, so it was easy to clear them out. whenever his intent is, that's the kind of thing that's going to happen there.
7:59 am
we can't have more disruption added because it's disruptive around there already and he's trying to make a living. we need to have the 43 it we need to have to enforce the conditional use authorizations. the planner i mentioned said she was out there in the daytime and knew the area, so she was astonished when i told her what was going on at night. she said it was so dead that she couldn't believe any life came to that block. essentially, the restaurants are gone. everything else is alcohol licenses now. this is not going to bring a light to the street in the daytime, but we have plenty of nighttime liveliness that we don't need. [tone] up the street, all of the police complaints which also happened